Dear developers, With the last known blockers resolved, I have now uploaded NMUs of the experimental versions of gcc-13 and gcc-14 to unstable, and a corresponding upload of dpkg changing the default build flags is expected to follow soon, probably within the day. As a result, the 64-bit time_t transition is now in progress in unstable. If your packages are any of the lists of those affected by the time_t ABI transition[0][1][2][3], it may be advisable to hold off uploads to unstable for the next few days in order to avoid any sort of accidental ABI skew on armel/armhf. And if your package is in the list of those requiring sourceful changes for the transition due to library package renames[0][1], PLEASE take care not to make uploads to unstable clobbering the NMUS and reverting the package renaming. In case you missed it previously, dd-list output saying whether you have a package that is affected can be found at [4]. To avoid pain for porters, the mass NMUs to unstable will only be started once gcc-13 and dpkg have been built on our 32-bit ports per <https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?suite=sid&p=gcc-13>. As a reminder, the wiki page for the release goal is here: https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/64bit-time See also the various threads on debian-devel for a more in-depth accounting of the work up to this point.[5] Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org [0] https://people.canonical.com/~vorlon/armhf-time_t/source-packages [1] https://people.canonical.com/~vorlon/armhf-time_t/lfs-source-packages [2] https://people.canonical.com/~vorlon/armhf-time_t/reverse-depends-sources [3] https://people.canonical.com/~vorlon/armhf-time_t/lfs-reverse-depends-sources [4] https://people.canonical.com/~vorlon/armhf-time_t/maintainer-list [5] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/02/msg00217.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature